Mining EST databases to resolve evolutionary events in major crop species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using plant EST collections, we obtained 1392 potential gene duplicates across 8 plant species: Zea mays, Oryza sativa, Sorghum bicolor, Hordeum vulgare, Solanum tuberosum, Lycopersicon esculentum, Medicago truncatula, and Glycine max. We estimated the synonymous and nonsynonymous distances between each gene pair and identified two to three mixtures of normal distributions corresponding to one to three rounds of genome duplication in each species. Within the Poaceae, we found a conserved duplication event among all four species that occurred approximately 50-60 million years ago (Mya); an event that probably occurred before the major radiation of the grasses. In the Solanaceae, we found evidence for a conserved duplication event approximately 50-52 Mya. A duplication in soybean occurred approximately 44 Mya and a duplication in Medicago about 58 Mya. Comparing synonymous and nonsynonymous distances allowed us to determine that most duplicate gene pairs are under purifying, negative selection. We calculated Pearson's correlation coefficients to provide us with a measure of how gene expression patterns have changed between duplicate pairs, and compared this across evolutionary distances. This analysis showed that some duplicates seemed to retain expression patterns between pairs, whereas others showed uncorrelated expression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".